I too have a soft spot for Moore in AVTAK and the film in general. I'm not sure why it is but I'm inclined to put Moore above Dalton in my ranking (Moore#3, Dalton#4), despite the latter easily being closer to the original character. I can't really explain it. In my view Dalton is the more faithful while Moore is the more entertaining.
Moore was all wrong for Bond from the very beginning. And it showed in every one of his films. He just did not project the danger and menance that is essential to an effective portrayal of 007. And I know I have said this many times before, but it bears repeating - Roger Moore was just awful at the physical stuff. To me, these shortcomings made him the least well-rounded Bond of all, and that is why he lands at the bottom of my list. I will admit to a certain bias toward Connery, who I feel is the only Bond actor to capture ALL of the traits I have come to love in the cinematic incarnation of Bond - charming, suave, ruthless, witty, resourceful and tough. Truly a hard act to follow, so I can't really blame it all on poor Roger. But in my opinion, all of the other actors who have portrayed Bond - Craig, Brosnan, Dalton, and yes, even Lazenby, were more successful in combining the most crucial elements of the James Bond character. No offense to those of you who enjoy Roger Moore's version of Bond, but for me his portrayal was the low point of the Bond film series.
He wasn't bad. It took him a while for him to ease into the role (which is one of the reasons why I dislike LALD and TMWTGG), but he was a lot of fun nonetheless, and when he attempted to be more serious in FYEO he succeeded beautifully. That said, he shouldn't have stuck around for OP and AVTAK. Those ones made him look terrible, and the sex scenes were borderline pedophilia.
To me, the only rubbish Moore Bond film was The Man With The Golden Gun. Over campy, no plot, ridiculous and no value whatsoever.
I liked Live And Let Die, loved Spy, FYEO and AVTAK. Enjoyed MR and OP.
Anyone who thinks Roger Moore is a rubbish Bond are those people stuck in the 60's with Connery's overrated Bond films. I mean they're great, Connery's first three but Moore's were also superb, OHMSS and TLD included.
I will be sorry to see Rog go when he passes (assuming he dies before I do), because he will always be an important part of the Bond film legacy. But it won't change my opinion that he was the least effective Bond actor. Just my opinion.
To me, the only rubbish Moore Bond film was The Man With The Golden Gun. Over campy, no plot, ridiculous and no value whatsoever.
I liked Live And Let Die, loved Spy, FYEO and AVTAK. Enjoyed MR and OP.
Anyone who thinks Roger Moore is a rubbish Bond are those people stuck in the 60's with Connery's overrated Bond films. I mean they're great, Connery's first three but Moore's were also superb, OHMSS and TLD included.
Considering Moore as a rubbish Bond has nothing to do with being stuck in the 60s. It has everything to do with recognizing a poor second rate actor being miscast in a first rate series of movies. Someone who is completely unconvincing in the physical scenes, the womanizing scenes and ruins the overall demeanor of the character is nothing but rubbish. The only time the actor fit the role was when Moore dressed as a a clown in Octopussy. A bad idea for James Bond executed by a bad actor.
To me, the only rubbish Moore Bond film was The Man With The Golden Gun. Over campy, no plot, ridiculous and no value whatsoever.
I liked Live And Let Die, loved Spy, FYEO and AVTAK. Enjoyed MR and OP.
Anyone who thinks Roger Moore is a rubbish Bond are those people stuck in the 60's with Connery's overrated Bond films. I mean they're great, Connery's first three but Moore's were also superb, OHMSS and TLD included.
Considering Moore as a rubbish Bond has nothing to do with being stuck in the 60s. It has everything to do with recognizing a poor second rate actor being miscast in a first rate series of movies. Someone who is completely unconvincing in the physical scenes, the womanizing scenes and ruins the overall demeanor of the character is nothing but rubbish. The only time the actor fit the role was when Moore dressed as a a clown in Octopussy. A bad idea for James Bond executed by a bad actor.
To me, the only rubbish Moore Bond film was The Man With The Golden Gun. Over campy, no plot, ridiculous and no value whatsoever.
I liked Live And Let Die, loved Spy, FYEO and AVTAK. Enjoyed MR and OP.
Anyone who thinks Roger Moore is a rubbish Bond are those people stuck in the 60's with Connery's overrated Bond films. I mean they're great, Connery's first three but Moore's were also superb, OHMSS and TLD included.
Considering Moore as a rubbish Bond has nothing to do with being stuck in the 60s. It has everything to do with recognizing a poor second rate actor being miscast in a first rate series of movies. Someone who is completely unconvincing in the physical scenes, the womanizing scenes and ruins the overall demeanor of the character is nothing but rubbish. The only time the actor fit the role was when Moore dressed as a a clown in Octopussy. A bad idea for James Bond executed by a bad actor.
There will be blood...however I am often amused/confused and just plain non-plused at the tortorous lengths and excuses that some 'Jolly Roger' fans go to to defend him. 'He saved the series' blah blah, 'it was the tone of the times' blah blah, ' and the funniest of all 'he could be tough and convincing when he wanted to' However the arguement with some real force was that DAD had already set the tone. Even this arguement fails for me as 'Big Tam' had a choice, he could play tough and convincing, or a lighter self parody. Roger had no such choice, and played it the only way he could.
Seems a lot of People would of wanted the series to go down the Dirty Harry, Deliverance route of the 70's. So in a way you guys now have the Bond you wanted In D Craig and the direction the series is now going, the more gritty/violent/Bourne Type Action/Computer Game Film.
Where as People like me, (Dinosaurs, I'll admitt ) Perfer the Lighter touch of a well place witty put down and a more Family friendly Movie. Still each to their Own.
Was Roger Moore a Rubbish Bond, IMHO NO, was he the Best, NO. In the same way I feel Danile Craig is not a Rubbish Bond, Or the Best. Like all actors he brings something of himself to the role and is told to do the rest.The Producers decide on what Direction the series goes. The 70's Bonds would of always had a lighter touch No matter who was Playing Bond, after all it started with DAF, with Connery Playing more for Laughs than suspence.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
have to agree with Thunderpussy. Most people, who critisize Moore to be too "light" have no idea, how it was in the 70s and 80s. 3 TV cannels and VCRs became affordable at around 1985 (AVTAK). Rambo was "born" in 1982 and was a revolution in terms of screen violence and it was rated 18.
When you wanted to see a movie, you went to the cinema, no alternatives there. Bond movies had to be rated 12 and the broader audience wanted to be entertained.
And I disagree: Connery was not at all tough in DAF, he was trying to be light and funny down to the pink tie that he was wearing. I don't find any serious moment at all in that movie btw.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I may of stated it badly, But I agree Bondtoys,DAF was the first of the lighter Bonds, Instead of suspence they went for the laughs, and that style just carried on through the 70's.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
For every "He saved the series" and "it was a sign of the times", there is an equal "Octopussy clown suit" or "unconvincing physical presence". Both parties do tend to repeat themselves.
I'm always amused/confused the lengths RM criticism reaches when petty swipes at the "comedic lightness" is the norm for analysis. I would not call some of these constructive criticism. A good number appear unhealthy obsessions. I also can't seem to shake the feeling a few simply can't stand to see the man does have fans.
Considering most who dislike RM also appear to be DC fans, then they have their "messiah" today. One would think they'd utilise their life experiences with a certain sense of sophistication and simply enjoy Craig's tenure. I know I have. (enjoyed that is, not become sophisticated);)
And for the record my favorite Bond and era was Connery.
and the direction the series is now going, the more gritty/violent/Bourne Type Action/Computer Game Film.
Where as People like me, (Dinosaurs, I'll admit ) Prefer the Lighter touch of a well place witty put down and a more Family friendly Movie. Still each to their Own.
I agree, the RM films seemed more 'events' then today's more jaded action dramas.
If you were coming to the films now as an adult, the appeal of the Moore era might pass you by, but if you grew up with them, they hit the spot. Of course, back then they were generally kids' movies in a way, there wasn't that tendency to treat these kind of action heroes as seriously as The Dark Knight, people had their own stuff to deal with like Vietnam, Bond was meant to be an escape from all that.
I have to admitt NP, you got me thinking, a 70's Dark Knight.
With Burt Renolds, and Sally field and Directed by Hal Needham )
Now there's a Movie I'd of Liked to of Seen. !
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Seems a lot of People would of wanted the series to go down the Dirty Harry, Deliverance route of the 70's. So in a way you guys now have the Bond you wanted In D Craig and the direction the series is now going, the more gritty/violent/Bourne Type Action/Computer Game Film.
Where as People like me, (Dinosaurs, I'll admitt ) Perfer the Lighter touch of a well place witty put down and a more Family friendly Movie. Still each to their Own.
Was Roger Moore a Rubbish Bond, IMHO NO, was he the Best, NO. In the same way I feel Danile Craig is not a Rubbish Bond, Or the Best. Like all actors he brings something of himself to the role and is told to do the rest.The Producers decide on what Direction the series goes. The 70's Bonds would of always had a lighter touch No matter who was Playing Bond, after all it started with DAF, with Connery Playing more for Laughs than suspence.
I think and hope that the modern Bond with DC can incorporate some lighter moments, not over the top like Moore but more like Connery. DC is such a refreshing Bond but we need to see a bit more of the old Bond however carefully controlled by the writers. Surely he will have at least one gadget this time around, even if its not too over the top
My Hopes exactly welshboy78, I hope they can find a happy medium ( Derek Acorah ) ) and bring a little of the humor back, or at least not so dark. I know it's hard to please everyone but I think it can be done.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I don't dislike Moore's performances, although he's certainly not my favourite Bond. However, I'll have to disagree with the majority verdict here: I think he does toughness and vengeance rather well (threatening to shoot Rosie after sex in Live And Let Die, throwing Sandor off the building in The Spy Who Loved Me, kicking Locque's car off the cliff in Live And Let Die and hurling the knife into Mischka (or is it Grischka?) in Octopussy). What he doesn't do so well is play opposite his leading ladies: whereas Connery came across as suave and confident (and Lazenby as playful and vulnerable), Moore tends to strike me as patronising and sleazy in the love scenes. I notice the same traits in his performances in The Saint so either it's a characteristic of his acting or simply how I view him.
Also, as I noted on another thread, I think that Sir Roger, more than any other Bond actor, tends to act up or down to the quality of his script. That said, even at his worst he never comes close to Connery's execrable performance in Diamonds Are Forever, which I think is the worst turn anyone has ever managed as Bond (made all the more shocking by how good he was in his other films).
As one who has consistently criticized Moore for not being convincingly "tough" enough, let me say that all you have done here is recite a number of moments in various films when Moore had an opportunity to show a tough side. In my opinion he was not convincing in any of those scenes. But it's not just the lack of toughness - it's also the lack of physical grit during fight scenes and other "man of action" moments. Even in what was admittedly his worst Bond (Diamonds Are Forever), when Connery battled Peter Franks in the elevator, or when he elbowed the hood in the face after the dude tossed Plenty out of the window, you BELIEVED Sir Sean could kick ass! I don't have as much of a problem as you do with the way Roger Morre played opposite his leading ladies, and he certainly had a way with the witticisms, but that's about all.
I don't dislike Moore's performances, although he's certainly not my favourite Bond. However, I'll have to disagree with the majority verdict here: I think he does toughness and vengeance rather well (threatening to shoot Rosie after sex in Live And Let Die, throwing Sandor off the building in The Spy Who Loved Me, kicking Locque's car off the cliff in Live And Let Die and hurling the knife into Mischka (or is it Grischka?) in Octopussy). What he doesn't do so well is play opposite his leading ladies: whereas Connery came across as suave and confident (and Lazenby as playful and vulnerable), Moore tends to strike me as patronising and sleazy in the love scenes. I notice the same traits in his performances in The Saint so either it's a characteristic of his acting or simply how I view him.
Also, as I noted on another thread, I think that Sir Roger, more than any other Bond actor, tends to act up or down to the quality of his script. That said, even at his worst he never comes close to Connery's execrable performance in Diamonds Are Forever, which I think is the worst turn anyone has ever managed as Bond (made all the more shocking by how good he was in his other films).
Even in what was admittedly his worst Bond (Diamonds Are Forever), when Connery battled Peter Franks in the elevator, or when he elbowed the hood in the face after the dude tossed Plenty out of the window, you BELIEVED Sir Sean could kick ass!
Agreed. The fight in the lift is very, very good and is one of only two things (the other being the entire pre-credits sequence) that I really like about Diamonds Are Forever.
Odd, I just don't see a thing wrong with Connery in DAF. Superb performance imo.
For a start, he really doesn't look the part: flabby, with bushy eyebrows and an obvious toupée. But to me, it's his acting as well as his appearance: Connery looks very bored (which I can understand given the dreadful script) and generally gives the impression that he's only going through the motions, with one eye on the pay cheque.
The toupee only looks odd to me in the Moon Buggy Vegas section of the film, even then it looks like a bad hair style rather than the Sinatra toupee of NSNA. Flabby, yeah, esp with Bambi and Thumper and the disrobing for Tiff Case. But it's all about the one-liners and Connery is brill with these. He doesn't look bored to me, unlike in parts of YOLT, but you're certainly not alone in your assessment.
I mean, in a way it's a Cary Grant type performance. You wouldn't say Grant was phoning it in...
The main problem I have with people who trot out the old "Moore doesn't look like a killer" schtick is....how many real-life killers (whether professional or otherwise) actually looked like killers? And being a secret agent, wouldn't it actually be more expedient for Bond to look harmless....so as to lure his enemies into a false sense of security?
The more people criticize Roger Moore the more I label the ones who do it as, well why don't you be James Bond. See how you pull it off on camera.
And why don't I make my own clothing, build my own car, brew my own beer, and become completely self-sufficient? Like everything else, movies are a product. And as consumers of that product, people have the right to critique it, especially when they have used it. I am no actor, but I paid money to watch those crappy Moore movies. Telling me or anyone who doesn't like Moore to be James Bond is just stupid.
The more people criticize Roger Moore the more I label the ones who do it as, well why don't you be James Bond. See how you pull it off on camera.
And why don't I make my own clothing, build my own car, brew my own beer, and become completely self-sufficient? Like everything else, movies are a product. And as consumers of that product, people have the right to critique it, especially when they have used it. I am no actor, but I paid money to watch those crappy Moore movies. Telling me or anyone who doesn't like Moore to be James Bond is just stupid.
Agreed....as tired and flawed as I find the same generic old anti-Moore arguments, the "could you do better?" fallacy is worse than all of them put together.
Comments
I suppose they do occasionally switch around.
I liked Live And Let Die, loved Spy, FYEO and AVTAK. Enjoyed MR and OP.
Anyone who thinks Roger Moore is a rubbish Bond are those people stuck in the 60's with Connery's overrated Bond films. I mean they're great, Connery's first three but Moore's were also superb, OHMSS and TLD included.
1. Dalton 2. Moore 3. Connery 4. Lazenby 5. Craig 6. Brosnan
Considering Moore as a rubbish Bond has nothing to do with being stuck in the 60s. It has everything to do with recognizing a poor second rate actor being miscast in a first rate series of movies. Someone who is completely unconvincing in the physical scenes, the womanizing scenes and ruins the overall demeanor of the character is nothing but rubbish. The only time the actor fit the role was when Moore dressed as a a clown in Octopussy. A bad idea for James Bond executed by a bad actor.
There will be blood...however I am often amused/confused and just plain non-plused at the tortorous lengths and excuses that some 'Jolly Roger' fans go to to defend him. 'He saved the series' blah blah, 'it was the tone of the times' blah blah, ' and the funniest of all 'he could be tough and convincing when he wanted to' However the arguement with some real force was that DAD had already set the tone. Even this arguement fails for me as 'Big Tam' had a choice, he could play tough and convincing, or a lighter self parody. Roger had no such choice, and played it the only way he could.
Where as People like me, (Dinosaurs, I'll admitt ) Perfer the Lighter touch of a well place witty put down and a more Family friendly Movie. Still each to their Own.
Was Roger Moore a Rubbish Bond, IMHO NO, was he the Best, NO. In the same way I feel Danile Craig is not a Rubbish Bond, Or the Best. Like all actors he brings something of himself to the role and is told to do the rest.The Producers decide on what Direction the series goes. The 70's Bonds would of always had a lighter touch No matter who was Playing Bond, after all it started with DAF, with Connery Playing more for Laughs than suspence.
When you wanted to see a movie, you went to the cinema, no alternatives there. Bond movies had to be rated 12 and the broader audience wanted to be entertained.
And I disagree: Connery was not at all tough in DAF, he was trying to be light and funny down to the pink tie that he was wearing. I don't find any serious moment at all in that movie btw.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I'm always amused/confused the lengths RM criticism reaches when petty swipes at the "comedic lightness" is the norm for analysis. I would not call some of these constructive criticism. A good number appear unhealthy obsessions. I also can't seem to shake the feeling a few simply can't stand to see the man does have fans.
Considering most who dislike RM also appear to be DC fans, then they have their "messiah" today. One would think they'd utilise their life experiences with a certain sense of sophistication and simply enjoy Craig's tenure. I know I have. (enjoyed that is, not become sophisticated);)
And for the record my favorite Bond and era was Connery.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
With Burt Renolds, and Sally field and Directed by Hal Needham
Now there's a Movie I'd of Liked to of Seen. !
I think and hope that the modern Bond with DC can incorporate some lighter moments, not over the top like Moore but more like Connery. DC is such a refreshing Bond but we need to see a bit more of the old Bond however carefully controlled by the writers. Surely he will have at least one gadget this time around, even if its not too over the top
Also, as I noted on another thread, I think that Sir Roger, more than any other Bond actor, tends to act up or down to the quality of his script. That said, even at his worst he never comes close to Connery's execrable performance in Diamonds Are Forever, which I think is the worst turn anyone has ever managed as Bond (made all the more shocking by how good he was in his other films).
Roger Moore 1927-2017
For a start, he really doesn't look the part: flabby, with bushy eyebrows and an obvious toupée. But to me, it's his acting as well as his appearance: Connery looks very bored (which I can understand given the dreadful script) and generally gives the impression that he's only going through the motions, with one eye on the pay cheque.
I mean, in a way it's a Cary Grant type performance. You wouldn't say Grant was phoning it in...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
1. Dalton 2. Moore 3. Connery 4. Lazenby 5. Craig 6. Brosnan
TV Tropes even has a whole page for this phenomenon:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic
And why don't I make my own clothing, build my own car, brew my own beer, and become completely self-sufficient? Like everything else, movies are a product. And as consumers of that product, people have the right to critique it, especially when they have used it. I am no actor, but I paid money to watch those crappy Moore movies. Telling me or anyone who doesn't like Moore to be James Bond is just stupid.
I wasted good money on the first two Star Wars prequels but I cut my losses and moved on.
Since those prequels were not released 26 years ago I had to move quick.
Agreed....as tired and flawed as I find the same generic old anti-Moore arguments, the "could you do better?" fallacy is worse than all of them put together.